DBA Unison: Reflections on the Rollup Working Principle, Sovereignty, and Composability
DBA Unison: Thoughts on the Rollup Approach, Sovereignty, and Composability
Many people believe that cross-chain bridges objectively define Rollups, and they think that Rollup consensus is powerless, and we must follow the “canonical rollup” as defined by L1 cross-chain bridges. However, Jon Charbonneau, co-founder of DBA, says this view is incorrect, as cross-chain bridges do not define Rollups.
All Rollups are Layer 1 (and Layer 2): 1) Enshrined Bridge Rollups are Layer 2. When I cross-chain Ethereum to Rollup, this is a classic Rollup as a Layer 2 of Ethereum, as I do not add any security or social consensus assumptions outside the ETH native chain. I do not trust the security and social consensus of Rollup; 2) Enshrined Bridge Rollups are Layer 1: Taking Optimism as an example, the value of OP comes from the consensus around the Optimism chain. The OP cross-chained to Ethereum will obtain its value from the underlying OP collateral on Optimism. If Optimism disappears, the wrapped token will have no value; 3) Ethereum is Layer 2: If I cross-chain OP tokens from Optimism to Ethereum, my OP maintains the same social consensus and security assumptions as Optimism, and the key point is that I do not add any new assumptions outside of Ethereum. In addition, when you use USDC on Ethereum, you are really trusting Circle, so yes, Ethereum is Circle’s Layer 2.
Reference: https://dba.mirror.xyz/LYUb_Y2huJhNUw_z8ltqui2d6KY8Fc3t_cnSE9rDL_o
